Originally posted by philkryder II note from your past postings that you won't own/shoot .40 s&w -
Is it possible that .40s&w in the glock (based on the earlier 9mm slide constraints) has a thinner barrel/chamber than other .40s&w and therefore may be slightly more prone to the Barrel/Slide failure you call a KB?
Or is there some other reason for objecting to the .40s&w?
Phil

I only shoot my reloads. Years ago, there was an old ordnance officer who posted on GT and, before GT, on UGW. Can't remember the guys' name, but he thought the .40 was poorly conceived and designed.

My personal believe is that shortening a case that works well (10mm) and using the same bullet weights dramatically decrease the margin for error when reloading. Also, just don't have any place in my "arsenal" for .40. I'm pretty happy with 9mm and .45ACP. I've done a lot of experimenting with .400 Cor-Bon and .40 Super, without having to change platforms.

To reiterate: If Glock's design were flawed in such a manner as to cause KB's, then we'd be hearing of tens of thousands of KB's, not the few that are posted on this and other websites. Ol' Occam even works with Glocks.

duck: Thanks to Glock's design, I suffered no damage from my REAL KB. Felt like I'd hit my trigger finger with a hammer, and I was afraid to look at my hand, as I expected to see part of my finger missing. Looked at finger and it was black, then I was afraid to clean the "black" off, for fear of seeing bone, mangled flesh, etc. Didn't even have a bruise!

As I've posted in the past, I was pleasantly surprised that Glock/Smyrna took care of me, even though I was using an aftermarket barrel with reloaded ammo.

Thanks for the interest and opinions expressed in this thread. I'd bet Ol' Pepper against a DemocRAT's brain (something valuable v. something worthless) that a "certain" specious website only quotes GT'ers who are on my infamous Ignore List, when discussing KB's and GT. That rates a big ol' "hardehardeharharhar!"

If G21's had "design flaws", wouldn't you think that I'd have had a problem by now, having fired over 100,000 rounds of my reloads through my G21's?? Some folks, of course, are offended by rational thought and "critical thinking skills."

I have no problems with my 9mm, .40S&W, .45ACP and .45GAP reloads fired through my Glocks.

If there are 2,000,000 Glocks and 100,000 S&W pistols chambered in .40S&W, you are likely to hear 20x more Glock problems, even though the percentage is the same.

In my experience, I have found nearly all KB's to be ammo problems, some to be shooter errors caused by ammo problems, but none that are design related problems.

If a .40 blows down the magazine due to Glock's chamber, isn't that better than blowing straight back into the shooter's face. The round is not blowing because of the chamber design, it is blowing because of excess powder/excess pressure.

The FBI tested six .40 caliber Glocks 20,000 rounds each. Do you think the FBI would have adopted Glock if there had been a KB?

AND yes, I have seen a Glock KB at at match in Conyers, GA. Brand new G33 with gun show reloads. Was it the pistol or was it the ammo? What do you think?

My question is would the same round that KBed in a Glock 40SW barrel have done so in a more supported chamber? Due to the large chamber and lack of support over the feel ramp there is less room for error using a Glock barrel. A barrel that leaves the brass bulged as badly as a factory Glock 40SW barrel is not for me. I installed a KKM. It's reliable, accurate and no more bulged brass.

Describe the KB any way you want, I don't want it happening to me. I do not trust Glock barrels in 40SW and hot reloads. I am a competative shooter and shoot thousands of reloads a year so I'll stick with the KKM.

I have a G17 Gen 1 that has a tight chamber and good case support, nothing wrong with this barrel that I could see.

The case failure can occur due to weak brass at normal pressures, but the ones people tend to be most worried about are those from over pressure.

Those usually happen because of imporperly loaded ammunition, and I suspect that most KBs are because of double loads.

Another problem is leading of the barrel. This is something Glock barrels are susceptable to. You should not fire unjackeded or at least plated bullets from a glock barrel. Lead can build up and cause overpressure.

These are issues that Glock owners should be aware of, but when using factory loaded ammo, they should not be a problem.

Those that choose to reload should use jacketed or at least plated bullets, and be aware that the less fully supported stock barrel can leave bulges in the brass, and decrease it's strength when it's resized. Reloading .40 brass that's been fired in a Glock barrel may not be a good decision, especially if you load hot loads.

I too would vote for a sticky on this one. Also, since I do not make a habit of frequenting "specious" web sites I have no way of knowing whether the fact that Portland continues to order Glocks is common knowledge or not, just ignored, or....? Well done, sir! ^c

I always like your parallels to "Things You Should've Learned in School (had you been paying attention)"

__________________
"Telling someone they're about to step on a landmine isn't a threat - it's good manners."
- Mike

Originally posted by WalterGA ....
Years ago, there was an old ordnance officer who posted on GT and, before GT, on UGW. Can't remember the guys' name, but he thought the .40 was poorly conceived and designed.

....

Regarding the argument based on anonymous appeal to authority, whether they are ill conceived or not, I think the same argument you made about Glocks in general also applies to .40s:
There are lots of them - and you will hear of failures.
If it were a real "problem" there'd be recalls.

Though I agree with your reasoning of reduced margin for error with heavier bullets, there are also many of us who shoot many rounds of .40 (including reloads) with no problems.

How long ago did this happen?
The reason why I ask is because I noticed that the case was a Federal. I heard or read somewhere that there might have been some issues with Federal cases being a little flimsy and were prone to blowouts. Also, I heard that they quietly fixed these deficiencies since then. BTW I load Federal cases in .40 these days with no apprehension.

Going on 2 years now. I remember hearing the same thing about Federal (after this incident, of course!). I do my best to stick with Winchester brass now in everything I load.

Originally posted by Custom Glock Racing Another note. Despite what some unscrupulous manufacturers will tell you there is no such thing as a fully supported barrel for a glock. They simply don't exist.

Why is this? Feed ramp? I'm not engineer enough to figure out why on my own.

Originally posted by pwharve Why is this? Feed ramp? I'm not engineer enough to figure out why on my own.

TIA.

--pwharve

Yes, because the magazine is so close to the chamber the feed ramp would be to steep, so they have to cut into the bottom of the chamber slightly, however there are many auto pistols that do this also not just glock.

Actually, a third party barrel with more chamber support in the 6 o'clock area may induce bullet setback to a greater degree than a standard Glock barrel since the third party barrel requires a steeper feed ramp, which puts more pressure on the bullet as it hits the feed ramp. (sorry for the run on sentence, but it was kinda fun).

And I think Danny has a good point about the fact that if there are 20 times more Glocks out there than another brand, you will of course here a lot more about Glocks even if the other brand has a similar problem ratio.